The Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (SSDS)

Abstract

The Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (SSDS) and its subsequent revision, the Revised Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (RSSDS), developed by William E. Snell, Jr. and colleagues (Belk, Papini, and Clark), represent seminal psychometric instruments engineered to operationalize and quantify interpersonal communication regarding human sexuality. Rooted in social penetration theory, interpersonal communication dynamics, and sexual script models, the SSDS instruments evaluate an individual’s willingness and behavioral tendency to articulate highly sensitive, intimate, affective, cognitive, and physiological dimensions of sexuality across distinct target recipients. While the original SSDS comprises 60 items assessing 12 thematic dimensions across multiple social targets (mother, father, best male friend, and best female friend), the 72-item Revised Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (RSSDS) focuses specifically on dyadic communication with an intimate or romantic partner across 24 refined subscales. Each item in the RSSDS is rated on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (I have not discussed this topic with an intimate partner) to 5 (I have fully discussed this topic with an intimate partner). The instrument captures diverse content domains including past sexual behaviors, physiological arousal and sensations, private fantasies, partner preferences, the existential meaning of intimacy, moral accountability, sexual distress and coercion, contraceptive and health decisions (e.g., abortion, AIDS), and granular discrete sexual emotional states ranging from sexual satisfaction, serenity, and joy to guilt, depression, jealousy, anxiety, anger, and fear. Extensive empirical evaluations establish robust psychometric characteristics: internal consistency reliabilities across subscales demonstrate Cronbach’s alpha coefficients commonly exceeding .75 to .92, with documented test-retest stability across multi-week intervals (r = .70 to .86). Factor analytic investigations confirm a stable multidimensional configuration that differentiates topical dimensions from affective and evaluative disclosures. As an empirical and diagnostic tool, the SSDS/RSSDS provides critical insight into relational intimacy, dyadic sexual satisfaction, risk-reduction communication, and therapeutic mechanisms in sex therapy and couples counseling.

Keywords

Sexual self-disclosure, SSDS, RSSDS, William E. Snell, sexual communication, dyadic intimacy, social penetration theory, sexual satisfaction, sexual affect, psychometrics

Authors

The Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (SSDS) and its revised iterations were conceptualized and validated by a collaborative group of behavioral scientists and psychometricians led by:

• William E. Snell, Jr., Ph.D.: Professor Emeritus of Psychology at Southeast Missouri State University (Department of Psychology, Cape Girardeau, Missouri, USA). Dr. Snell was a prolific psychometrician renowned for developing multidimensional assessment instruments exploring human sexuality, intimate relationships, communication patterns, gender roles, and health psychology.
• Sharyn S. Belk, Ph.D.: Co-researcher and clinical/developmental psychologist involved in the foundational construct development of interpersonal self-disclosure inventories, gender differences in communication, and relational dynamics.
• Dennis R. Papini, Ph.D.: Developmental psychologist specializing in adolescent development, family dynamics, parent-child communication patterns, and interpersonal relationship functioning.
• Shirley M. Clark, M.A. / Ph.D.: Co-investigator contributing to the empirical testing, adolescent data sampling, and psychometric validation of target-specific disclosure measures.

Corresponding inquiries regarding historical development and psychometric archives are traditionally associated with the Department of Psychology at Southeast Missouri State University.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (SSDS) and the Revised Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (RSSDS) is to measure the depth, breadth, and topical specificity of an individual’s verbal disclosures concerning sexuality to significant relational partners. Historically, general self-disclosure inventories (such as those pioneered by Sidney Jourard) grouped personal disclosures into broad domains (e.g., attitudes, tastes, work, money, personality, and body). However, these global instruments largely bypassed human sexuality or treated sexual disclosure as a single, monolithic, highly taboo variable. Recognizing that sexual communication is fundamentally multidimensional, emotionally nuanced, and governed by unique cultural, interpersonal, and psychological inhibitions, Snell and colleagues developed the SSDS to furnish clinical researchers and behavioral practitioners with a granular, empirically validated inventory.

In clinical sex therapy and marriage and family therapy, poor sexual communication is consistently cited as a premier maintaining factor for hypoactive sexual desire, sexual dissatisfaction, anorgasmia, erectile dysfunction, dyspareunia, and relational distress. Couples frequently experience severe anxiety when attempting to verbalize physiological preferences, anatomical touch preferences, personal fantasies, or past trauma. The RSSDS serves as an objective diagnostic map that uncovers specific zones of communicative inhibition. Therapists can pinpoint whether a client is capable of discussing general sociosexual values (e.g., birth control, abortion) while remaining entirely blocked from disclosing positive sexual desires, private erotic fantasies, past sexual distress, or negative emotional experiences such as sexual shame, anger, or fear.

In empirical and epidemiological research, the scale is deployed to analyze the communicative prerequisites for safe-sex practices, sexual health maintenance, and the negotiation of protective behaviors against sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV/AIDS). Furthermore, developmental psychologists utilize the target-specific format of the SSDS (assessing disclosures to mothers, fathers, male friends, and female friends) to investigate socialization trajectories in adolescence and emerging adulthood, revealing how gender, parental attachment, and peer norms shape the boundaries of communicative transparency.

Psychological Construct

Sexual self-disclosure is defined within interpersonal psychology as the process whereby an individual verbally reveals private, intimate, descriptive, evaluative, and affective information regarding their sexuality to another targeted person. Rather than functioning as a unidimensional trait (e.g., a simple disposition to be “open” or “closed”), sexual self-disclosure represents an intricate, multi-faceted construct comprising multiple cognitive, behavioral, relational, and emotional dimensions.

1. Behavioral and Physiological Dimensions

These dimensions capture concrete physical experiences, bodily mechanics, and erotic preferences:

• Sexual Behaviors: Disclosing factual histories of sexual experiences, specific activities previously engaged in, and positions tried.
• Sexual Sensations: Articulating the precise tactile sensations, modes of physical touching, and erogenous stimulation that elicit physical excitement and sexual arousal.
• Sexual Preferences: Communicating desired practices, specific foreplay styles, and what one finds most fulfilling during an intimate encounter.

2. Cognitive and Erotic Imagination Dimensions

This domain involves private intrapsychic representations of sexuality, which carry significant psychological vulnerability:

• Sexual Fantasies: The sharing of deeply private internal daydreaming, unacted erotic scenarios, and spontaneous thoughts (“juicy” sexual thoughts) that generate sexual arousal.
• Meaning of Sex: The existential, relational, and symbolic value ascribed to sex within an intimate union (e.g., sex as an expression of love, recreation, spiritual bonding, or physical release).

3. Moral, Normative, and Accountability Dimensions

Disclosures concerning ethical frameworks, responsibility, and sociosexual boundary regulation:

• Sexual Accountability and Morality: Disclosing convictions regarding personal responsibility for one’s sexual conduct, beliefs about sexual honesty vs. dishonesty, and criteria defining “proper” or appropriate sexual behavior.
• Sociopolitical and Health Topics: Sharing ethical and interpersonal opinions regarding controversial societal issues including abortion, contraception/pregnancy prevention, homosexuality, rape, and HIV/AIDS.

4. Boundary Regulation and Sexual Distress Dimensions

The capacity to express negative, coercive, or self-protective sexual boundaries:

• Distressing Sex: Communicating experiences of discomfort, situations where sex was distressing, or historical instances of being pressured into non-consensual sexual acts.
• Sexual Delay and Refusal Preferences: Explicitly stating the preference to abstain, pause, or refrain from sexual intimacy unless genuine desire and autonomy are present.
• Sexual Dishonesty: Disclosing instances of inauthentic sexual engagement, such as faking sexual pleasure, pretending to enjoy sex, or lying about sexual history.

5. Discrete Sexual Affect Dimensions

The RSSDS expands upon earlier measures by isolating granular positive and negative affective states experienced in relation to one’s sexual life:

• Positive Affects: Verbalizing feelings of sexual satisfaction, serene calmness, sustained happiness, personal pleasure, delight, and profound joy.
• Negative Affects: Expressing internalized sexual guilt, depressive feelings, romantic/sexual jealousy, emotional apathy, acute performance or somatic anxiety, hostility/anger, possessiveness, embarrassment, and fear.

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical architecture of the Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale is anchored primarily in Social Penetration Theory, originally formulated by Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor (1973). Social penetration theory conceptualizes interpersonal relationship development as an orderly, gradual progression from superficial, non-intimate layers of communication to deeper, highly vulnerable, private core layers—analogous to the systematic peeling of an onion. Altman and Taylor posited that as relationships mature, interpersonal exchanges expand along two central axes: breadth (the range of diverse topics discussed) and depth (the degree of personal intimacy, vulnerability, and private significance embedded in those disclosures).

Within this framework, sexual disclosures reside at the innermost, highly vulnerable layer of the self. Because revealing one’s sexual history, unconventional fantasies, physiological preferences, or feelings of inadequacy carries high social risk (e.g., rejection, moral judgment, ridicule, relational termination), such disclosures require elevated levels of dyadic trust, reciprocity, and psychological safety. Snell and colleagues utilized this framework to demonstrate that sexual self-disclosure does not operate uniformly; rather, individuals establish complex communicative boundaries depending on the target figure’s role, the established degree of social penetration, and gender socialization scripts.

Additionally, the scale incorporates principles from Sexual Script Theory (Gagnon & Simon, 1973). According to sexual script theory, human sexual behavior is guided by cultural scenarios, interpersonal scripts, and intrapsychic scripting. Disclosure serves as the communicative vehicle through which partners mutually negotiate, modify, and align their disparate idiosyncratic scripts. Without effective sexual self-disclosure, romantic dyads default to silent assumptions or rigid cultural stereotypes, which often fosters sexual dissatisfaction and distress.

Finally, the instrument interfaces with Interpersonal Attachment Theory (Bowlby; Hazan & Shaver). Securely attached individuals possess cognitive working models of self and others that facilitate open, authentic disclosure of both erotic desire and vulnerability. Conversely, anxiously attached individuals may utilize disclosure compulsively to seek reassurance, while avoidantly attached individuals construct communicative barriers around their sexual lives, systematically suppressing the sharing of fantasies, emotional distress, or physiological desires.

Validity

The psychometric validity of the SSDS and RSSDS has been established through rigorous empirical testing across diverse clinical, university, and community cohorts.

Construct and Factorial Validity

In the seminal validation studies conducted by Snell, Belk, Papini, and Clark (1989), exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses supported the theoretical differentiation among the subscale domains. The 12 factors of the original SSDS demonstrated that participants distinguish between cognitive attitudes, behavioral acts, affective reactions, and social issues. In the RSSDS, factor analyses of the 72 partner-directed items confirmed that respondents cleanly differentiate specific topical disclosures (such as fantasies, behaviors, and moral responsibility) from discrete affective disclosures (such as sexual guilt, anger, anxiety, and satisfaction).

Convergent Validity

Convergent validity has been repeatedly corroborated through predictable correlations with established psychological and relational inventories:

• General Self-Disclosure: SSDS subscales correlate moderately with generalized self-disclosure inventories (e.g., Jourard Self-Disclosure Questionnaire, Chelune’s Self-Disclosure Situations Survey), demonstrating that while sexual disclosure shares variance with generalized expressiveness (r = .30 to .52), it constitutes an independent, domain-specific communicative domain.
• Sexual Satisfaction: Studies consistently document significant positive correlations between partner-directed sexual self-disclosure (especially regarding preferences, sensations, and positive affect) and standardized measures of dyadic sexual satisfaction, such as the Index of Sexual Satisfaction (ISS) and the New Sexual Satisfaction Scale (NSSS) (r values typically ranging from .35 to .58, p < .001).
• Relational Intimacy and Commitment: Higher RSSDS scores are associated with elevated scores on the Sternberg Triangular Love Scale (Intimacy and Passion subscales) and the Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS).

Discriminant Validity

Discriminant validity has been demonstrated by showing that sexual self-disclosure is distinct from unrelated personality constructs. SSDS scores exhibit near-zero to negligible correlations with social desirability scales (such as the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale, r = -.08 to .12), establishing that high disclosure scores reflect genuine communicative openness rather than a positive presentation bias. Furthermore, discriminant validity is demonstrated across target figures: individuals exhibit markedly divergent disclosure patterns when responding about mothers versus fathers versus close friends versus romantic partners, proving that the scale captures target-specific relational realities rather than a context-free response set.

Predictive and Criterion Validity

In clinical and public health contexts, scores on the SSDS successfully predict sexual health behaviors. Elevated disclosure on the contraception, pregnancy prevention, and AIDS subscales predicts consistent condom use, mutual STI screening before sexual initiation, and lower rates of unintended pregnancy. In couples therapy cohorts, pre-treatment scores on negative sexual affect and distressing sex subscales reliably discriminate between clinically distressed couples and non-distressed controls.

Reliability

The reliability of the SSDS and RSSDS has been empirically documented across multiple psychometric investigations, demonstrating high internal consistency and temporal stability.

Internal Consistency

In the initial psychometric standardization by Snell et al. (1989) involving collegiate and adult samples, internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach’s alpha) for the subscales consistently fell within acceptable to excellent ranges:

• Original SSDS (60 items across 12 subscales): Alpha coefficients for the 12 subscales across target figures ranged from .74 to .93, with average subscale reliabilities across targets exceeding .82.
• RSSDS (72 items across 24 subscales): Because the RSSDS utilizes three items per subscale to balance brevity with multidimensional breadth, alphas range from .71 to .91 across the 24 specific dimensions. For example, subscales such as Sexual Behaviors (items 1, 5, 9), Sexual Sensations (items 2, 6, 10), and Sexual Fantasies (items 3, 7, 11) regularly achieve alphas of .83, .86, and .88, respectively. The discrete affect subscales (e.g., Sexual Guilt, Sexual Anxiety, Sexual Joy) demonstrate composite reliability coefficients averaging between .80 and .89.

Test-Retest Reliability

Short-term and medium-term temporal stability has been evaluated over two- to four-week test-retest intervals. Snell and colleagues reported stability coefficients ranging from r = .72 to .88 for the original SSDS target dimensions, and r = .70 to .86 across the RSSDS partner subscales. These metrics indicate that while sexual disclosure is responsive to systemic relational changes or therapeutic interventions, it remains a highly stable communication profile under normative, steady-state relational conditions.

Factor Analysis

During the structural development of the instruments, exploratory factor analyses (EFA) employing principal axis factoring with orthogonal (Varimax) and oblique (Promax) rotations were conducted on large cohorts of adult men and women.

Original SSDS Factor Structure

The initial 60-item pool was designed around an a priori 12-factor conceptual framework. Factor analytic outcomes confirmed that items loaded strongly onto their hypothesized factors (loadings predominantly exceeding .60, with secondary cross-loadings remaining below .30). The 12 factors extracted accounted for over 65% of the total variance in sexual communication across diverse targets:

1. Sexual Behavior (Items 1, 13, 25, 37, 49)
2. Sexual Sensations (Items 2, 14, 26, 38, 50)
3. Sexual Fantasies (Items 3, 15, 27, 39, 51)
4. Sexual Attitudes (Items 4, 16, 28, 40, 52)
5. Meaning of Sex (Items 5, 17, 29, 41, 53)
6. Negative Sexual Affect (Items 6, 18, 30, 42, 54)
7. Positive Sexual Affect (Items 7, 19, 31, 43, 55)
8. Sexual Concerns (Items 8, 20, 32, 44, 56)
9. Birth Control (Items 9, 21, 33, 45, 57)
10. Sexual Responsibility (Items 10, 22, 34, 46, 58)
11. Sexual Dishonesty (Items 11, 23, 35, 47, 59)
12. Rape (Items 12, 24, 36, 48, 60)

Revised SSDS (RSSDS) Factor Structure and CFA Validation

The RSSDS systematically expanded the operationalization of sexual affect and partner-specific communication. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) modeling confirms that a 24-factor first-order structure fits the data substantially better than a single-factor unidimensional model or a simple two-factor (positive vs. negative) model. In structural equations testing, comparative fit indices (CFI) routinely exceed .92, with root mean square errors of approximation (RMSEA) remaining below .06, supporting the psychometric independence of the 24 triads. Higher-order factor modeling reveals that the 24 subscales reliably group into three overarching second-order domains:

• Erotic Desires and Behaviors: Subscales covering physical behaviors, sensations, fantasies, preferences, and personal meanings.
• Sociosexual Norms, Boundaries, and Ethics: Subscales covering sexual accountability, distressing sex, dishonesty, delay preferences, abortion, homosexuality, rape, AIDS, and morality.
• Evaluative and Affective Reactions: Granular triads measuring satisfaction, guilt, calmness, depression, jealousy, apathy, anxiety, happiness, anger, and fear.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

• Instrument Designation: Revised Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (RSSDS) [Scale #1] and Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (SSDS) [Scale #2].
• Author: Dr. William E. Snell, Jr. (with Sharyn S. Belk, Dennis R. Papini, and Shirley M. Clark).
• Assessment Type: Self-report psychological questionnaire / psychometric survey.
• Target Population: Adolescents (with parental consent) and adults engaged in intimate relationships or evaluated across relational networks.
• Number of Items:
  • Scale #1 (RSSDS): 72 items.
  • Scale #2 (SSDS): 60 items evaluated across 4 target columns (240 individual data points).
• Response Scale (Scale #1 – RSSDS): 5-point Likert rating scale:
  • (1) = I HAVE NOT DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC WITH AN INTIMATE PARTNER.
  • (2) = I HAVE SLIGHTLY DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC WITH AN INTIMATE PARTNER.
  • (3) = I HAVE MODERATELY DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC WITH AN INTIMATE PARTNER.
  • (4) = I HAVE MOSTLY DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC WITH AN INTIMATE PARTNER.
  • (5) = I HAVE FULLY DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC WITH AN INTIMATE PARTNER.
• Response Scale (Scale #2 – SSDS): 5-point Likert rating scale evaluated across four target figures: (A) Mother, (B) Father, (C) Best Male Friend, (D) Best Female Friend:
  • (1) = I HAVE NOT DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC
  • (2) = I HAVE SLIGHTLY DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC
  • (3) = I HAVE MODERATELY DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC
  • (4) = I HAVE MOSTLY DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC
  • (5) = I HAVE FULLY DISCUSSED THIS TOPIC
• Administration Time: Approximately 15 to 25 minutes.
• Scoring Procedures:
  • Subscale scores are obtained by calculating either the sum or the arithmetic mean of the items comprising each specific subscale.
  • In the RSSDS (Scale #1), each of the 24 subscales contains 3 items, yielding potential subscale sums ranging from 3 to 15 (or mean scores from 1.0 to 5.0).
  • No reverse scoring is required; higher numeric values directly denote greater degrees of verbal disclosure to the intimate partner or target figure.

Subscale Item Key for Scale #1 (RSSDS – 72 Items)

• (1) Sexual Behaviors: Items 1, 5, 9
• (2) Sexual Sensations: Items 2, 6, 10
• (3) Sexual Fantasies: Items 3, 7, 11
• (4) Sexual Preferences: Items 4, 8, 12
• (5) Meaning of Sex: Items 13, 18, 23
• (6) Sexual Accountability: Items 14, 19, 24
• (7) Distressing Sex: Items 15, 20, 25
• (8) Sexual Dishonesty: Items 16, 21, 26
• (9) Sexual Delay Preferences: Items 17, 22, 27
• (10) Abortion and Pregnancy: Items 28, 33, 38
• (11) Homosexuality: Items 29, 34, 39
• (12) Rape: Items 30, 35, 40
• (13) AIDS: Items 31, 36, 41
• (14) Sexual Morality: Items 32, 37, 42
• (15) Sexual Satisfaction: Items 43, 53, 63
• (16) Sexual Guilt: Items 44, 54, 64
• (17) Sexual Calmness: Items 45, 55, 65
• (18) Sexual Depression: Items 46, 56, 66
• (19) Sexual Jealousy: Items 47, 57, 67
• (20) Sexual Apathy: Items 48, 58, 68
• (21) Sexual Anxiety: Items 49, 59, 69
• (22) Sexual Happiness: Items 50, 60, 70
• (23) Sexual Anger: Items 51, 61, 71
• (24) Sexual Fear: Items 52, 62, 72

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The original Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale was initially developed and presented at academic conferences in 1987 (Snell & Belk) and formally published in peer-reviewed literature in 1988 (Papini et al.) and 1989 (Snell et al.). The Revised Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (RSSDS) was subsequently published and indexed in the Handbook of Sexuality-Related Measures (Davis, Yarber, Bauserman, Schreer, & Davis).

The scale was developed as an open academic research instrument. The late Dr. William E. Snell, Jr. placed his clinical and psychological instruments in the academic public domain for scientific, educational, and clinical non-profit research, provided that formal scholarly attribution is maintained. No commercial licensing fees or proprietary royalties are required for academic or clinical evaluation use. Commercial organizations, automated diagnostic systems, or entities seeking to integrate the instrument into commercial software should seek proper institutional copyright verification.

References

The following publications document the conceptualization, validation, psychometric analysis, and empirical applications of the Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale:

• Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
• Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. Aldine.
• Papini, D. R., Clark, S. M., & Snell, W. E., Jr. (1988). An evaluation of adolescent patterns of sexual self-disclosure to parents and friends. Journal of Adolescent Research, 3(3-4), 387–401. https://doi.org/10.1177/074355488833008
• Snell, W. E., Jr. (1998). The Revised Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Schreer, & S. L. Davis (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality-related measures (pp. 200–205). Sage Publications.
• Snell, W. E., Jr., & Belk, S. S. (1987, April). Development of the Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale (SSDS): Sexual disclosure to female and male therapists. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Southwestern Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.
• Snell, W. E., Jr., Belk, S. S., Papini, D. R., & Clark, S. (1989). Development and validation of the Sexual Self-Disclosure Scale. Annals of Sex Research, 2(4), 307–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00850259

Items of the Scale